green
Positive treatment
8.4 score
Treatment trajectory · 2000 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
2000
2013
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 19 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited "see"
Shara v. Binghamton Precast & Supply Corp.
GOVERNING LEGAL STANDARD The EPA, which was enacted in 1963 as an amendment to the FLSA, prohibits payment of unequal wages for equal work on grounds of sex, unless the difference is justified by seniority, merit, quality or quantity of production, or any other factor not based on sex. 29 U.S.C. § 206 (d); see Anderson v. State Univ. of N.Y., 169 F.3d 117 , 119 (2d Cir. 1999), vacated on other grounds, 528 U.S. 1111 (2000).
discussed
Cited "see"
Osorio v. Information Resources Inc.
Legal Standard The EPA, which was enacted in 1963 as an amendment to the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”), prohibits payment of unequal wages for equal work on grounds of sex, unless the difference is justified by seniority, merit, quality or quantity of production, or any other factor not based on sex. 29 U.S.C. § 206 (d); see Anderson v. State Univ. of N.Y., 169 F.3d 117 , 119 (2d Cir. 1999), vacated on other grounds, 528 U.S. 1111 (2000).
discussed
Cited "see"
Whalen v. Morice
See Pryor v. Reno, 171 F.3d 1281 , 1288 n.10 (11th Cir. 1999), rev’d on other grounds, 528 U.S. 1111 (2000); Condon v. Reno, 155 F.3d 453, 464-65 (4th Cir. 1998), rev’d on other grounds, 528 U.S. 141 (2000).
discussed
Cited "see"
Watts v. City of Hollywood
(2×)
See Collier v. Dickinson, 477 F.3d 1306, 1308 (11th Cir.2007) (citing Pryor v. Reno, 171 F.3d 1281 , 1288 n. 10 (11th Cir.1999), rev’d on other grounds, 528 U.S. 1111 , 120 S.Ct. 929 , 145 L.Ed.2d 807 (2000)); Ela v. Orange Cnty.
discussed
Cited "see"
Mary Ann Collier v. Fred O. Dickinson, III
(2×)
See Pryor v. Reno, 171 F.3d 1281 , 1288 n. 10 (11th Cir.1999), rev’d on other grounds, 528 U.S. 1111 , 120 S.Ct. 929 , 145 L.Ed.2d 807 (2000).
discussed
Cited "see"
Siler-Khodr v. University of Texas Health Science Center San Antonio
(2×)
See Anderson v. State Univ., 169 F.3d 117 (2d Cir.1999), vacated and remanded, 528 U.S. 1111 , 120 S.Ct. 929 , 145 L.Ed.2d 807 (2000); Varner v. Ill.
cited
Cited "see"
Anderson v. State University of New York
See Anderson v. State Univ. of New York, 169 F.3d 117 (2d Cir.1999), cert, granted and judgment vacated, - U.S. -, 120 S.Ct. 929 , 145 L.Ed.2d 807 (2000).
cited
Cited "see"
Frank v. United Airlines, Inc.
See Arnett v. California Public Employees Retirement System, 179 F.3d 690, 697 (9th Cir.1999), vacated , — - U.S. -, 120 S.Ct. 930 , 145 L.Ed.2d 807 (2000).
discussed
Cited "see"
Thomas v. National Labor Relations Board
See Prescott v. County of El Dorado, 177 F.3d 1102, 1108 (9th Cir.1999) (finding use of local presumption unconstitutional), vacated, — U.S. -, 120 S.Ct. 929 , 145 L.Ed.2d 807 , reinstated in part, 204 F.3d 984 (9th Cir.2000); Hohe v. Casey, 956 F.2d 399, 410-11 (3d Cir.1992) (rejecting a local presumption); Lowary v. Lexington Local Bd. of Educ., 903 F.2d 422, 431 (6th Cir.1990) (finding a local union presumption unconstitutional).
discussed
Cited "see"
Vega-Castro v. Commonweatlh of Puer
See State Univ. of N.Y., College at New Paltz v. Anderson, — U.S. -, 120 S.Ct. 929 , 145 L.Ed.2d 807 (2000), vacating 169 F.3d 117 (2d Cir.1999); Illinois State Univ. v. Varner , — U.S. -, 120 S.Ct. 928 , 145 L.Ed.2d 806 (2000), vacating 150 F.3d 706 (7th Cir.1998). 2 .
cited
Cited "see"
Arnett v. California Public Employees' Retirement System (PERS)
See California Public Employees’ Retirement System v. Arnett, -U.S.-, 120 S.Ct. 930 , 145 L.Ed.2d 807 (2000).
cited
Cited "see"
Prescott v. County of El Dorado
See Prescott v. El Dorado, - U.S. -, 120 S.Ct. 929 , 145 L.Ed.2d 807 (2000).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Rollins v. City of Albert Lea
(2×)
For example, in Travis v. Reno, the court concluded that there is no legitimate expectation of confidentiality — and, therefore, no constitutional right to privacy — in an individual’s name, address, telephone number, photograph, social security number, driver identification number, and medical or disability information. 12 F.Supp.2d 921, 925 (W.D.Wis.1998), rev’d on other grounds, 163 F.3d 1000 (7th Cir.1998); see also Pryor v. Reno, 171 F.3d 1281 , 1288 n. 10 (11th Cir.1999) (stating that “there is no constitutional right to privacy in motor vehicle record information”), rev’d …
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Kennedy v. City of Braham
(2×)
For example, in Travis v. Reno, the court concluded that there is no legitimate expectation of eonfi-dentiality^and, therefore, no constitutional right to privacy — in an individual’s name, address, telephone number, photograph, social security number, driver identification number, and medical or disability information. 12 F.Supp.2d 921, 925 (W.D.Wis.1998), rev’d on other grounds, 163 F.3d 1000 (7th Cir.1998); see also Pryor v. Reno, 171 F.3d 1281 , 1288 n. 10 (11th Cir.1999) (stating that “there is no constitutional right to privacy in motor vehicle record information which the DPPA e…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Rasmusson v. Chisago County
(2×)
For example, in Travis v. Reno, the court concluded that there is no legitimate expectation of confidentiality — and, therefore, no constitutional right to privacy — in an individual’s name, address, telephone number, photograph, social security number, driver identification number, and medical or disability information. 12 F.Supp.2d 921, 925 (W.D.Wis.1998), rev’d on other grounds, 163 F.3d 1000 (7th Cir.1998); see also Pryor v. Reno, 171 F.3d 1281 , 1288 n. 10 (11th Cir.1999) (stating that “there is no constitutional right to privacy in motor vehicle record information”), rev’d …
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Wanda L. Adams v. Florida Power Corporation
See also Arnett v. California Public Employees Retirement System, 179 F.3d 690 (9th Cir.1999), vacated and remanded on other grounds, 528 U.S. 1111 (2000) (plaintiffs’ claim that employer’s disability benefits program which discriminated on the basis of potential years of service, rather than actual years of service, adversely affected older workers stated a valid claim of disparate impact under the ADEA).
examined
Cited "see, e.g."
Wanda L. Adams v. Florida Power Corporation
(4×)
See also Arnett v. California Public Employees Retirement System, 179 F.3d 690 (9th Cir.1999), vacated and remanded on other grounds, 528 U.S. 1111 , 120 S.Ct. 930 , 145 L.Ed.2d 807 (2000) (plaintiffs' claim that employer's disability benefits program which discriminated on the basis of potential years of service, rather than actual years of service, adversely affected older workers stated a valid claim of disparate impact under the ADEA).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Cummings v. Connell
(2×)
Dist., 131 F.3d 807 , 813 (9th Cir.1997); see also Prescott v. El Dorado County, 177 F.3d 1102, 1107-08 (9th Cir.1999) (“real independent verification of the financial data in question” required under Hudson), vacated in part and remanded, 528 U.S. 1111 , 120 S.Ct. 929 , 145 L.Ed.2d 807 (2000), reinstated in part and remanded, 204 F.3d 984 (9th Cir.2000).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
State University of New York, College at New Paltz
v.
Anderson
v.
Anderson
No. 98-1845.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Jan 18, 2000.
Cited by 4 opinions | Published
C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari granted, judgment vacated, and case remanded for further consideration in light of Kimel v. Florida Bd. of Regents, ante, p. 62.